"Failed" yet still in service for training. Converts always have problems; in the Su-25s case a narrow undercarriage subverted an otherwise remarkably rugged STOL attack aircraft. Real killer imo was maximizing hangar space, why have dedicated bombers that need fighter escort when you can strap bombs to the fighters?
It didn't crash. It was pilots error. When he landed the right wing was tilted than the left. It damaged the landing gear. When landing both wings should be parallel to the ground. This aircraft has armoured plating on its body to take hit of 30mm anti aircraft rounds so a few bruises on carrier deck would hardly do any damage. However it is a air force plane and should not be modified into a naval one.
A smooth landing isn't always possible on a carrier because of bad weather, rough seas etc. where the ship will be pitching and rolling and the flight deck will become a moving target. That's why carrier aircraft have to be able to withstand heavy landings and the SU-25 was clearly never designed with this in mind.
It's probably because of the weak landing gear. The Su-25 is designed for slow rate of decent landings, carrier aircraft usually have much stronger gear to help with the high decent speeds. As for the decent speed, it's required to be that high because it's easier to pinpoint a spot to land, which is important on such small flight decks
But it was a twin engine attack aircraft. While NLCA was single engine... Though it was succes but it will not be used Bec of limited Weapon carrying capacity...
@@rajatdani619 The fact that matter is that we were successful in operating an Aircraft from a carrier. That means when we'll develop TEDBF we won't have a situation like that you just saw.
@@sibinbose1977 A10 was was never made to land on a carrier 🤦🏻♂️ It was made to fly at lower altitudes to kill Terrorists and insurgents at an affordable price Try researching a lil bit before an embarassing comparison...
@@PS-ug7nmSu-25 also never meant to be a carrier-based aircraft, UTG version is just outcome of some madman that decided to put arrestor hook on a two-seated Su-25 and call it a day (and somehow it actually work)
This is not a new video, but an old one to show that Su 25, were also tested for the carrier operations and why they failed,
russian aircraft carrier pe ek video banao please
Please make a video.. On OFB new anti material rifle.. That must be interesting to watch.
A Wide Wing Span and a Small Width Between the Two Main Landing Gear Wheels is a Recipe for Crash.
"Failed" yet still in service for training. Converts always have problems; in the Su-25s case a narrow undercarriage subverted an otherwise remarkably rugged STOL attack aircraft.
Real killer imo was maximizing hangar space, why have dedicated bombers that need fighter escort when you can strap bombs to the fighters?
Salute to the pilots tho
Clearly show why we shouldn't be discouraged if any thing bad happens on our aircraft development phase
*_There is no such thing as failure. There are only experiments and efforts._*
Yes there is.. sometimes experiments "fail". It's an expected outcome but surely, apart from tons of learning
If experiments fail to satisfy the laid requirements then those experiments are "failed" attempts.
It didn't crash. It was pilots error. When he landed the right wing was tilted than the left. It damaged the landing gear. When landing both wings should be parallel to the ground. This aircraft has armoured plating on its body to take hit of 30mm anti aircraft rounds so a few bruises on carrier deck would hardly do any damage. However it is a air force plane and should not be modified into a naval one.
You are describing a crash
A smooth landing isn't always possible on a carrier because of bad weather, rough seas etc. where the ship will be pitching and rolling and the flight deck will become a moving target. That's why carrier aircraft have to be able to withstand heavy landings and the SU-25 was clearly never designed with this in mind.
1:22 That black smoke🤮🤮🤮🤮
What's wrong with that? I see our hornets do that daily
@@kes01523 same with the F15 and F14 to name a few.
lol see mig 29's from Polish AF and how they run diesel , i actually find the unburnt fuel quite impressive
Thank God pilots are safe... And I hope plane was repaired soon. 😊😊
A Wide Wing Span and a Small Width Between the Two Main Landing Gear Wheels is a Recipe for Crash.
Salute to these brave pilots!
1 st
Plz make a video on Sheyang J 8, Chengdu j 10 and HQ 9 Vs Brahmos
Others : Crash landing😨
Russia : Landing crash😎
Cyka blyat......
CN su 25 operate from Carrier?
That thing is a flying tank. Kudos to them for even attempting this
3rd
2nd
Jai hind🇮🇳🇮🇳
Not india it's Uraaaa Russia
frogfoot u66la kyu nahi??
😷😷😷
☹☹
was it because of it's longer tail?
Maybe due to poor weight distribution especially on the back.
It's probably because of the weak landing gear. The Su-25 is designed for slow rate of decent landings, carrier aircraft usually have much stronger gear to help with the high decent speeds. As for the decent speed, it's required to be that high because it's easier to pinpoint a spot to land, which is important on such small flight decks
Why
su-39🤓🤓🤓🤓☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻
Those puffy flight suits look ridiculous. They look like they all need a diaper change.
This tell us why N-L.C.A was a success.
But it was a twin engine attack aircraft.
While NLCA was single engine...
Though it was succes but it will not be used Bec of limited Weapon carrying capacity...
@@rajatdani619 The fact that matter is that we were successful in operating an Aircraft from a carrier.
That means when we'll develop TEDBF we won't have a situation like that you just saw.
@@razor1869 ys, that's why I have said it was a success.
As it open the path for Tedbf.
Approach speed is high I guess.
It's because Su 25 aren't made for carrier landings and also it doesn't have a hook.
@@AnIndianPatriot look carefully it does have a hook, yes it was never ment for carrier borne ops
Is it real
No fake...
Computer Animated h, U noe CGI vagera.
Nah su25 paid actor hai
where is the crash..wth?🤔😠
You didnt see the collapsed gear?
sad news
Saalo purana video hai
If this were a western jet it would have broken in half and caught fire...
A10 is more rugged than this
@@Mrv9019 can A 10 land on a carrier nooo
@@sibinbose1977 A10 was was never made to land on a carrier 🤦🏻♂️
It was made to fly at lower altitudes to kill Terrorists and insurgents at an affordable price
Try researching a lil bit before an embarassing comparison...
@@PS-ug7nm WHAT?! LoL the A-10 outdates either of those terms, by DECADES my dude.
@@PS-ug7nmSu-25 also never meant to be a carrier-based aircraft, UTG version is just outcome of some madman that decided to put arrestor hook on a two-seated Su-25 and call it a day (and somehow it actually work)
Everybody asks the same Question
A10 vs Su25..
I say Su25 anyday!!!!
Lol a10c is way better
@@creepingdeath72 reasons?
But does it brrrrrrrrt
@@bruhman7925 su 25 does brrrrt as well
@@yogeshkumarallum2540 good, we can brrrtt together
This is yak 130 . Not su 25 😆
That confidence though..
That's Sukhoi Su-25UTG "Grach" not Yakovlev Yak-130 "Mitten". I don't know how can someone mix-up these two fighters, both have lots of differences.
@@DefenceMatrix 😂😂😂
@@DefenceMatrix In Arnab Goswami voice.... "kuch bhi... Matlab kuch bhi...."
@@DefenceMatrix 😂
Watch video on 2x
You will love the music. 😍😍🇮🇳🇮🇳
Para mere kere serhamadjambeje hemanahej 🤣👌🖕